The Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai has directed developer Ramaniyam Real Estates Pvt Ltd to pay ₹5 lakh compensation and refund amount paid by a senior citizen for buying a flat along with interest.
According to complaint filed by K.R. Parthasarathy, 69, he had booked a flat in the project developed for senior citizens at Sholinganallur by Appudhi Real Estates Pvt Ltd in 2013. The firm subsequently got merged with Ramaniyam. The builder had promised to provide access control system to the building and buzzer alarm in each room of the flat, he said. He had paid about ₹44.27 lakh towards purchase of UDS, cost of construction and other services.
In his complaint, he claimed that the builder lured him to enter into an agreement to a flat meant for senior citizens by promising to provide special security facilities such as access control system to the building, but has not kept their promise despite repeated requests. In its response, the builder said it never promised or undertook to provide the security facilities namely access control. and that it had constructed the flat as per specifications set out in the construction agreement. The Commission rejected the builder’s argument and noted that it is a novel and ingenious argument. “Any construction agreement would not contain the particulars of common facilities like lifts, pathways, children play area, sewerage treatment plant, club house, gym etc. But these amenities and facilities would invariably find place in the brochure or any other kind of advertisement,” it noted. Therefore, the builder cannot argue that the buyer has no right to ask for the amenities and facilities, which are not mentioned in the construction agreement, the Commission said.
Further, the builder said the facility had to be provided by Covai Senior Care Construction Ltd (with which it had entered into an agreement). However, the Commission rejected this argument too and said that buyer cannot be made a party to a contract entered between the builder and the other party.
The Commission concluded that there was deficiency in service on the part of the builder and directed it to pay compensation for mental agony and hardship caused to the buyer.
It also told the builder to refund ₹44.27 lakh along with interest of ₹11.29 lakh accrued till December 31, 2016 and thereafter with interest at 9% per annum for ₹44.27 lakh till payment and ₹10,000 litigation cost to the buyer.
